Students’ perceptions of the value of electronic feedback—Does disciplinary background really matter?

Feedback on student work is a key mechanism for improving learning in higher education (HE) and can be provided in a variety of forms. Recently, many institutions have moved to the provision of electronic feedback, although evidence for the effectiveness of this is mixed. While many studies evaluating the students’ perception of feedback are now available, there is little evidence of contrasting perceptions of its value according to different disciplines. This work aims to evaluate the relationship between students’ expectations and perception of feedback, especially electronic, and the disciplinary area of study in HE. Students (n = 1017) across different courses from a post-1992 university in the UK were surveyed and categorised into five disciplinary clusters: Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics; Business and Accounting; Art and Design; Media and Languages; and Psychology and Social Care. Perceived relevance as well as the most pertinent features and expectations of the quality of electronic feedback for students varies according to disciplinary cluster and thus closely aligns with a specific cluster’s learning and teaching practices. The findings of this study may help institutions to reflect on the role of electronic feedback as part of their ongoing assessment practice and how teaching in the different disciplines may result in different understandings of the value of electronic feedback.     

A scholarly approach to solving the feedback dilemma in practice

It is clear from the literature that feedback is potentially the most powerful and potent part of the assessment cycle when it comes to improving further student learning. However, for some time, there has been a growing amount of research evidence that much feedback practice does not fulfil this potential to influence future student learning because it fails in a host of different ways. This dilemma of the disjuncture between theory and practice has been increasingly highlighted by the UK National Student Survey results. This paper uses a model of the assessment process cycle to frame understandings drawn from the literature, and argues that the problem with much current practice resides largely in a failure to effectively engage students with feedback. The paper goes on to explore how best to effectively engage students with assessment feedback, with evidenced examples of feedback strategies that have successfully overcome this problem.     

Making space for democracy through assessment and feedback in higher education: thoughts from an action research project in education studies

This paper reports on an action research project into the development of a ‘democratic feedback model’ with students on an education studies programme at a post-1992 university in the UK. Building on work that has explored the dialogic dimensions of assessment and feedback, the research explored the potential for more democratic practice in this area. Although much learning and teaching on the programme in question took a collaborative and dialogic approach, assessment and feedback were modelled entirely differently, around the concept of an ‘expert’ marker and ‘novice’ marked. The findings of the research indicate the elements necessary for ‘democratic feedback’, and illustrate the emotional impact of moving from more transmission-based models, grounded in notions of expertise, towards democratic practice. They also highlight the ways in which such work can alert students to the imperfect, messy and human nature of the assessment process. Although the model has limited applicability in its extant form, its constitutive elements might be usefully incorporated within existing practice to promote democratic learning.     

Using student feedback to improve teaching

Gathering student feedback on teaching practice is commonly used in educational settings as an improvement tool and performance measure. Typically this feedback is collected using rating style surveys when a subject concludes; however, whether this practice improves the quality of teaching requires further research. This study was designed using an action research methodology to investigate the impact of student feedback on teacher practices in a secondary setting. Specifically, the efficacy of an ongoing, collaborative feedback model in which teachers collected student feedback regularly, were guided in reflecting on the data, and were supported through professional development to improve their practices was explored. Results supported student feedback as a valuable improvement tool, and powerful stimulus for teacher reflection. Student feedback informed teachers on the effectiveness of their practice and identified areas for future professional learning. Additionally, it opened up a dialogue around teaching and learning in the classroom, and gave the teachers insights into the unique challenges experienced by their students.     

The supportive character of teacher education triadic conferences: detailing the formative feedback conveyed

This study explored feedback conveyed in nine triadic conferences in teacher education practicum. The supportive character of formative feedback was explored in detail by employing a framework that combines two conceptualisations of feedback.The study depicted feedback directed backwards, upwards or forward and focusing performance, strategies, self-regulation or personal characteristics inside a framework of self-regulated learning. Findings show the teacher student to be more active in feed up, feed back and feed forward than previous studies have shown. Furthermore the conversations were found to be characterised by joint problem-solving in which all three parties focused on the student’s professional teacher-becoming. In conclusion, the findings indicate a feedback practice characterised by ‘sustainable’ feedback that scaffolds students’ self-assessing competence while fostering student self-reflexivity and self-regulation.     

Getting the Message Across: The problem of communicating assessment feedback

Current literature provides useful insights into the role of assessment feedback in student learning, yet fails to recognise its complexity as a unique form of communication. This article outlines ideas emerging from ongoing research into the meaning and impact of assessment feedback for students in higher education. We argue that new models of communication are required to understand students' responses to the language of tutors' comments, and that issues of discourse, identity, power, control and social relationships should be central to any understanding of assessment feedback as a communication process. Implications of adopting an alternative perspective for research and practice are identified and discussed.     

Drawing Pedagogies in Higher Education: the Learning Impact of a Collaborative Cross‐disciplinary Drawing Course

Drawing is taught in higher education across art and design but also, increasingly, in medical education, with a variety of aims and approaches. It is argued that there is a need, in both these disciplinary domains, to make more explicit the underpinning pedagogical approach to drawing and the impact that different approaches have on learning. The research described in this article focuses on an optional drawing course for undergraduate craft students and medical students. The course is run by the College of Arts and Humanities at a UK university and has a thematic focus on the human body. This qualitative case study sets out, in the context of selected theory about the teaching and learning of drawing, to explore what the learning impact of a particular collaborative model of teaching drawing was on a cross‐disciplinary student group. Findings included, with reference to Riley's framework of drawing pedagogies, that a range of philosophical and pedagogical ideas about drawing were blended from the teaching perspective in a way that enabled students from distinct disciplinary backgrounds to engage and learn. A shift was observed in students’ perceptions of drawing, with both sets of students questioning previously held assumptions about the use and value of drawing within their learning. Life drawing and anatomy laboratory drawing, in particular, provoked deep and challenging reflections about different cultural conceptions of the human body and the practice of collaborative drawing, with dialogic reflection, enabling insights to be developed into different disciplinary epistemologies.     

The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback

Student feedback literacy denotes the understandings, capacities and dispositions needed to make sense of information and use it to enhance work or learning strategies. In this conceptual paper, student responses to feedback are reviewed and a number of barriers to student uptake of feedback are discussed. Four inter-related features are proposed as a framework underpinning students’ feedback literacy: appreciating feedback; making judgments; managing affect; and taking action. Two well-established learning activities, peer feedback and analysing exemplars, are discussed to illustrate how this framework can be operationalized. Some ways in which these two enabling activities can be re-focused more explicitly towards developing students’ feedback literacy are elaborated. Teachers are identified as playing important facilitating roles in promoting student feedback literacy through curriculum design, guidance and coaching. The implications and conclusion summarise recommendations for teaching and set out an agenda for further research.     

Lecturers’ views of assessment design,marking and feedback in higher education: a case for professionalisation?

Abstract

Research on professional assessment practice in higher education does not always take account of lecturers’ perceptions and experiences, or their disciplinary context. This questionnaire study was designed to explore lecturers’ views about three inter-related elements of professional assessment practice: assessment design, marking and feedback. It consisted of two questionnaires: the Assessment Design Inventory (ADI), previously published, and the Assessment, Marking and Feedback Inventory (AMFI) which was newly developed for this study. The two main purposes of the research were to: i) establish the validity of these two questionnaires as research tools, ii) explore the existence of professional practice in assessment and analyse any perceived hindrances as well as possible effects of participants’ subject discipline. 356 lecturers from two UK universities, with a range of teaching experience and representing soft and hard disciplines, took part. Results indicated that the ADI and the AMFI were robust instruments. Findings showed evidence of assessment professionalism, but also some areas where it was lacking, together with a perceived need for formal training. Participants recognised that there were certain hindrances in putting their pedagogical beliefs into practice. The implications of this study are discussed in terms of advancing the sector’s understanding of assessment professionalism.     

From fixing the work to improving the learner: An initial evaluation of a professional learning intervention using a new student-centred feedback model

Despite the longstanding recognition of the power of feedback to enhance student learning outcomes, its potential is often not realised in classroom practice. Recent research highlights the need for a student-centred perspective to enable effective feedback practices that foster student self-regulation. Based on an identified gap in the literature, a new empirically-informed student-centred feedback model (SCFM) was designed. This study, contextualised in English writing, investigated to what extent a professional learning intervention using the SCFM was perceived as effective in promoting student-centred classroom feedback practices. Focus group interview data from 49 teachers and 30 school leaders across 13 Australian primary schools were thematically analysed. Results suggest the intervention caused shifts in thinking, feedback practices, and student self-regulation, which participants perceived had enhanced student learning outcomes. This study provides initial empirical evidence regarding (1) the effectiveness of the SCFM, and (2) the professional learning intervention characteristics required to realise effective feedback practices.     

‘Let your data tell a story:’ climate change experts and students navigating disciplinary argumentation in the classroom

ABSTRACT

Science education trends promote student engagement in authentic knowledge in practice to tackle personally consequential problems. This study explored how partnering scientists and students on a social media platform supported students’ development of disciplinary practice knowledge through practice-based learning with experts during two pilot enactments of a project-based curriculum focusing on the ecological impacts of climate change. Through the online platform, scientists provided feedback on students' infographics, visual argumentation artifacts that use data to communicate about climate change science. We conceptualize the infographics and professional data sets as boundary objects that supported authentic argumentation practices across classroom and professional contexts, but found that student generated data was not robust enough to cross these boundaries. Analysis of the structure and content of the scientists’ feedback revealed that when critiquing argumentation, scientists initiated engagement in multiple scientific practices, supporting a holistic rather than discrete model of practice-based learning. While traditional classroom inquiry has emphasized student experimentation, we found that engagement with existing professional data sets provided students with a platform for developing expertise in systemic scientific practices during argument construction. We further found that many students increased the complexity and improved the visual presentation of their arguments after feedback.     

Assessment,feedback and marking guides in distance education

In higher education (HE), effective feedback on student assessments plays a vital role in retention and in the development of self‐regulating learners, particularly in the first year. In distance learning, where large population modules are common, assignment feedback is generally supported by standard marking guides, issued to the numerous tutors responsible for assessing student work. In this paper, we develop a taxonomy of feedback and report on the results of a survey of tutor attitudes to, and strategies for, providing feedback on a very large Level 1 Open University module. We analyse the extent to which the marking guides afford adequate support for truly effective feedback, and make a number of recommendations for reworking assessment regimes and marking guides.     

Using and rejecting peer feedback in the science classroom: a study of students’ negotiations on how to use peer feedback when designing experiments

Background: Research on peer assessment has noted ambiguity among students in using peer assessment for improving their work. Previous research has explained this in terms of deficits in the student feedback, or differences in student views of what counts as high-quality work.

Purpose: This study frames peer assessment as a social process in the science classroom. The aim is to explore peer assessment in science education as social practice in order to contribute to an understanding of the affordances and constraints of using peer assessment as a learning tool in science education.

Design and Method: The study was conducted in four lower secondary school classes, school years 8 and 9, in two different schools. An intervention study was designed focussing on the topic of experimental design. It involved the students in a process of peer assessment where they designed experiments individually, and then exchanged their designs, conducted each other’s experiments, provided feedback to each other and revised their original design after discussing the feedback in groups. Data were collected in the form of audio recordings of student discussions and written work.

Results: The results show that, although not all peer feedback resulted in revisions, peer feedback was useful to the students in group interaction when negotiating quality in their work.

Conclusions: To conclude, the potential for using peer assessment in science education should not only be evaluated through the students’ revisions but also in terms of in what ways the feedback constitutes interactional resources for defining quality in student work.     

A social perspective on teaching and learning in the context of computer-mediated communication in teacher education

Abstract

In a context where ever greater emphasis is placed on the need to exploit the potential of information and communications technology, this article argues the need for a theoretical underpinning to such developments. In higher education, the emphasis is often placed on the assumed improved cost-effectiveness associated with ‘flexible’ and ‘independent’ student learning as one of the major benefits, although such notions as flexible and independent learning tend to be taken for granted. It is argued further that even where benefits to learning are emphasised, these are often founded on relatively impoverished views of learning. Often such views fit with a technocentric and positivist perspective on learning, emphasising as they do individualism, information delivery and a limited role for the tutor. This article outlines an alternative theoretical perspective based upon Vygotskian social psychology, activity theory and social practice. Such a perspective is characterised by an emphasis on interaction, communication and collaboration. Learning itself is seen as an aspect of participation in communities of practice, in which the human relationships between teachers and students are seen as fundamental. The theory is exemplified with reference to the use of computer-mediated communication in teacher education using FirstClass computer conferencing software.     

Making sense of module feedback: accounting for individual behaviours in student evaluations of teaching

Quantitative student evaluations of teaching (SET) and assessments are widely used in higher education as a proxy for teaching quality. However, SET are a function of individual rating behaviours resulting from student background, knowledge and personalities, as well as the learning experience being rated. SET from three years of data from a science department at a Russell Group University in the UK were analysed to highlight issues of sample size in relation to variable perceptions of modules, and develop a statistical model of feedback incorporating individual rating behaviours across modules. Key results are that sample size and individual rating behaviours have the potential to significantly affect summary module ratings, especially for <20 respondents or if individuals have heterogeneous views. A new approach is suggested, to interpret and compare quantitative module ratings, acknowledging uncertainty, variability and individual rating behaviours. This has implications for the interpretation of SET in many aspects of academic life, including university league table positions, the identification of good teaching practice with respect to student satisfaction, and the weight given to SET in individual academics’ promotion applications.     

Student perspectives on formative feedback as part of writing portfolios

Despite the crucial role that students play in formative assessment practices, student perspectives on such practices are relatively under-researched. Through a qualitative analysis of 128 reflection notes written by student teachers of English, this article investigates the students’ perceptions of formative feedback as part of portfolio assessment at two teacher education institutions in Norway. As such, it contributes to bridging the gap between research and practice. Students received peer and teacher feedback on assignments and wrote reflection notes during the semester. Findings show that students are positive towards teacher feedback and highlight the significance of teacher praise. Main objections raised against peer feedback concern the lack of constructive criticism. However, positive attitudes towards peer discussion groups suggest that they may be a more effective way of implementing peer assessment than formalised written peer commentary. Student reflections suggest that a failure to understand the task and the feedback is a possible hindrance to successfully revising assignments. Overall, students’ positive attitudes towards the portfolio process, which includes multiple drafting, suggest that students in higher education would benefit from more opportunities to revise and resubmit their work, yet they need adequate practice in providing peer feedback, and interpreting and implementing feedback in general.     

Feedback loops and the longer-term: towards feedback spirals

A key challenge for feedback practice involves promoting student uptake through the closing of feedback loops. This paper investigates feedback loops by using the concepts of single and double-loop learning to interrogate student responses to feedback. Single-loop learning tackles an identified problem or task, whereas double-loop learning additionally re-evaluates how the problem or task is approached. Evidence from a five-year longitudinal enquiry into four undergraduate students’ experiences of feedback is used to analyse feedback loops. Students reported a variety of experiences: failing to engage significantly with end-of-semester comments; short-term uptake within modules which had two assignments; and longer-term efforts at improving their learning strategies. A model of long-term student engagement with feedback is proposed, including single-loop feedback processes, double-loop feedback processes and unresolved learning puzzles. Whereas feedback loops are mainly focused on the shorter-term, it is suggested that feedback spirals represent an alternative way of analysing complex, iterative longer-term learning processes. Implications for practice focus on student self-regulation and the development of student feedback literacy.     

Validating written feedback in clinical formative assessment

Abstract

Formative assessment is widely accepted as being crucial to promoting student learning and, since 2010, the UK General Medical Council has mandated its use in workplace-based clinical training for all new doctors. As a result, the Royal College of Radiologists (RCR) instituted a range of formative workplace-based assessments including the Radiology Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (Rad-DOPS), in which supervisors appraise trainees’ performance in carrying out clinical procedures. This paper reports on the quality of the written feedback in 2,500?Rad-DOPS online feedback forms in addressing the aims of the new assessment approach. Random samples of 500 were selected from the first three years of the new assessment implementation, 2010–13, and from 2016 to 17. Using an appropriate coding frame, the feedback was analysed across the samples against key trainee attributes including stage of training and level of adjudged competence. Criteria for identifying high quality feedback were derived from the literature and a simplified form of qualitative comparative analysis was used to identify the conditions associated with high quality feedback. An average of 97% of the assessments contained written feedback but the number of instances of high quality feedback was found to be exceedingly small at around 5%. The paper offers suggestions for making the feedback process more purposeful in achieving the aims of formative assessment.     

Designing effective,contemporary assessment on a flipped educational sciences course

ABSTRACT

Evidence shows flipped learning increases academic performance and student satisfaction. Yet, often practitioners flip instruction but keep traditional curricula and assessment. Assessment in higher education is often via written exams. But these provide limited feedback and do not ask students to put knowledge into practice. This does not support the tenets of flipped learning. For two years, the author flipped instruction but retained traditional curricula and assessment. However, on the author’s current course, all three aspects were redesigned to better support flipped learning. The aim of this research is to test the effectiveness of this redesign regarding student engagement and satisfaction. Thus, it is asked: How, on this course, can meaningful, continuous assessment be provided as well as effective, personalized feedback, while staying in line with the philosophy of flipped learning? Action research took place from September 2016 to June 2017. Quantitative data from a student survey, and qualitative data from a research diary and student focus group were gathered. What emerged is: a little-and-often assessment approach is effective for learning and engagement; tasks must be authentic and test demonstration of knowledge, not memory; quality, not quantity, is key for student learning; and students desire individualized feedback.